Jeff Green, Plus First, plus Wallace, For Rudy Gay Rental.

[gpap]

Seems what is being ignored here is that we'll have more cap space next year. Wallace's salary will be off the books with the trade, and we don't have Green's player option hanging over our heads either.

Not saying I would do it, but I think the whole "overpriced Gay" angle I've seen in a few post misses the point completely.

The question is, will having Gay now thus making us the favorites to retain him or the alternative if deciding not to keep him and having more cap space next year is more attractive than staying the course with Green and Wallace, one who has a player option and another set to make 10 millions next year as well (and in the meantime look for other opportunities). And of course the retention of the 1st round pick.

It's a good point.

Plus maybe I am in the minority when I say this, but I think Rudy Gay is a better player than Jeff Green.

Minority of who? Celtics fans here?

Sorta yeah. I kinda get the impression not many here are fans of Gay as a player, where I think he'd be an upgrade over JG.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Seems what is being ignored here is that we'll have more cap space next year. Wallace's salary will be off the books with the trade, and we don't have Green's player option hanging over our heads either.

Not saying I would do it, but I think the whole "overpriced Gay" angle I've seen in a few post misses the point completely.

The question is, will having Gay now thus making us the favorites to retain him or the alternative if deciding not to keep him and having more cap space next year is more attractive than staying the course with Green and Wallace, one who has a player option and another set to make 10 millions next year as well (and in the meantime look for other opportunities). And of course the retention of the 1st round pick.

while there is that aspect of the deal to consider, there's the flip side of it as well for Sac --> would they want to take on the definite extra year for Wallace and risk that Green opts out after next year?  I can't see them doing that.

I'm also against using any draft picks to unload Wallace.  no need.  we're not contending next year no matter what so having his contract on the books next year isn't a killer.  also, next year he's finally an expiring deal and provides a nice balancing salary in any potential trade deals for well-paid players where we may have to ship out some youth that are on small contracts.  Wallace's deal isn't the hideous tragedy that some make it out to be (other than the fact he's just way overpaid for his current productivity but many are overpaid by that standard)

Wallace's deal is becoming less of a hideous tragedy as it winds down, but giving up a first round pick for a major boost to our 2015 FA opportunities is hardly a hideous tragedy either.

The thing about Wallace is that we can stretch his contract next year, and pay him $3 million per year for 3 seasons.

So the question is, is gaining that $3 million extra in cap space next year (and avoid paying $3 million for 2 more years after that) worth the first rounder? I'm of the opinion that it isn't, but I'll have to see how the salary cap plays out.

I definitely wouldn't stretch Wallace out.  we're not contending next year.  if we can't use him as part of a trade, let him play out the contract and be rid of him for the following year.

Who says we are not contending next year? And also, it's about opportunity, next year might just be the best chance to use our cap space, after that it gets trickier with our own players coming off their rookie deals, etc.

do you honestly believe that with this roster we're anywhere near contending next year? 

I'm not worried about the cap space in regards to our players coming off their rookie deals right now.  no one's shown that they're worth breaking the bank for yet.  the league will also have a higher cap so still not worried about it especially when all the vet contracts we want to shed will have come off by that following year at the latest (and most of them coming off the books after this year).

the 2015 offseason will have us trying to resign Rondo, living with Wallace's deal for one more year (while undoubtedly trying to use it in a trade for someone to pair with Rondo), AB's deal, Turner's cheap deal and a number of young players still on their rookie deals.  last thing I see as a hurdle is having to stretch Wallace or give away picks to move his contract.

Why are you focusing on THIS roster, when we're talking about cap space and acquiring one or two high impact players using it, with the side benefit of keeping most if not all our youth (which so far seems to be developing quite well) around?

If we stretch Wallace, we'd have about 33 million used up on our core player assets who aren't free-agents (Green, Smart, Sully, Young, Olynyk, Turner).

If Green opts out, we have $24 million.

And these figures can be made even lower if we decide not to exercise some of the team options of these assets (maybe because of a better opportunity presents itself)

To put it into perspective, this year's salary cap is 63 million and a big jump is expected next year.

That's either 30 million of de facto cap space to work with give or take or 39 million... and that's using these year's figures, it should be larger next year with the cap jump.

So you have potentially 40 million to use to resign Rondo and fill-up the rest of the roster as you see fit.

Will we manage to do something worthwhile with it? Who knows, but we are retaining the core of our contributors (who are young and on team friendly deals) while still having plenty of money to spread around if opportunity knocks.

I don't see how you waste that opportunity to get better just because you think THIS roster will not compete next year... and I don't know why that's an argument worth having because it's not THIS roster we'll potentially have.

So, the point is... if the chance come you stretch Wallace, if it doesn't you don't do it. But not doing it based on the believe that THIS roster will not compete next year is a bit short sighted.

[gpap]

Yeah, count me in with the camp of if you add a tier A free agent next summer and then a free agent just a tier below that (like Gasol and Gay), then I think we are back in the Eastern Conference finals.

We would certainly need a couple decent role players, but it be a huge difference over what we have now.

Does it win you a championship? That I can't say, but I am willing to take the risk.

[slamtheking]

Seems what is being ignored here is that we'll have more cap space next year. Wallace's salary will be off the books with the trade, and we don't have Green's player option hanging over our heads either.

Not saying I would do it, but I think the whole "overpriced Gay" angle I've seen in a few post misses the point completely.

The question is, will having Gay now thus making us the favorites to retain him or the alternative if deciding not to keep him and having more cap space next year is more attractive than staying the course with Green and Wallace, one who has a player option and another set to make 10 millions next year as well (and in the meantime look for other opportunities). And of course the retention of the 1st round pick.

while there is that aspect of the deal to consider, there's the flip side of it as well for Sac --> would they want to take on the definite extra year for Wallace and risk that Green opts out after next year?  I can't see them doing that.

I'm also against using any draft picks to unload Wallace.  no need.  we're not contending next year no matter what so having his contract on the books next year isn't a killer.  also, next year he's finally an expiring deal and provides a nice balancing salary in any potential trade deals for well-paid players where we may have to ship out some youth that are on small contracts.  Wallace's deal isn't the hideous tragedy that some make it out to be (other than the fact he's just way overpaid for his current productivity but many are overpaid by that standard)

Wallace's deal is becoming less of a hideous tragedy as it winds down, but giving up a first round pick for a major boost to our 2015 FA opportunities is hardly a hideous tragedy either.

The thing about Wallace is that we can stretch his contract next year, and pay him $3 million per year for 3 seasons.

So the question is, is gaining that $3 million extra in cap space next year (and avoid paying $3 million for 2 more years after that) worth the first rounder? I'm of the opinion that it isn't, but I'll have to see how the salary cap plays out.

I definitely wouldn't stretch Wallace out.  we're not contending next year.  if we can't use him as part of a trade, let him play out the contract and be rid of him for the following year.

Who says we are not contending next year? And also, it's about opportunity, next year might just be the best chance to use our cap space, after that it gets trickier with our own players coming off their rookie deals, etc.

do you honestly believe that with this roster we're anywhere near contending next year? 

I'm not worried about the cap space in regards to our players coming off their rookie deals right now.  no one's shown that they're worth breaking the bank for yet.  the league will also have a higher cap so still not worried about it especially when all the vet contracts we want to shed will have come off by that following year at the latest (and most of them coming off the books after this year).

the 2015 offseason will have us trying to resign Rondo, living with Wallace's deal for one more year (while undoubtedly trying to use it in a trade for someone to pair with Rondo), AB's deal, Turner's cheap deal and a number of young players still on their rookie deals.  last thing I see as a hurdle is having to stretch Wallace or give away picks to move his contract.

Why are you focusing on THIS roster, when we're talking about cap space and acquiring one or two high impact players using it, with the side benefit of keeping most if not all our youth (which so far seems to be developing quite well) around?

If we stretch Wallace, we'd have about 33 million used up on our core player assets who aren't free-agents (Green, Smart, Sully, Young, Olynyk, Turner).

If Green opts out, we have $24 million.

And these figures can be made even lower if we decide not to exercise some of the team options of these assets (maybe because of a better opportunity presents itself)

To put it into perspective, this year's salary cap is 63 million and a big jump is expected next year.

That's either 30 million of de facto cap space to work with give or take or 39 million... and that's using these year's figures, it should be larger next year with the cap jump.

So you have potentially 40 million to use to resign Rondo and fill-up the rest of the roster as you see fit.

Will we manage to do something worthwhile with it? Who knows, but we are retaining the core of our contributors (who are young and on team friendly deals) while still having plenty of money to spread around if opportunity knocks.

I don't see how you waste that opportunity to get better just because you think THIS roster will not compete next year.

I think something got lost in the back and forth.  we're basically in agreement on what you've said except that I don't believe this team will be in contention based on current assets.  with a lot of cap room becoming available in the next 2 years, I think there's opportunity to improve what we have.  just a matter of capitalizing on it.

[nostar]

Plus maybe I am in the minority when I say this, but I think Rudy Gay is a better player than Jeff Green.

I'm not sure you're in the minority. Gay might be the better player but their career numbers are so similar it would be hard to make that argument. Gay shoots more but he scores at the same rate. I think the systems each player has been can account for the fluctuation of production. If you compare just last year's numbers Gay is the superior player. If you compare their 2012-13 seasons then Green looks slightly better.

The difference here is that Green has been in Steven's system for a year now, has very similar production to Gay's, is cheaper (and will probably stay cheaper), and we don't have to give up anything for him.

I'm not in to moving Green unless we get a significant upgrade (not exactly growing on trees) or assets to continue the rebuild. Green was our leading scorer so moving him puts us further in the lotto discussion but I'd balk at moving him for the sake of Hinkie-ing. A few ideas I had:

Green to WAS for Porter/Seraphin
Green to CHA for MKG
Green/Bass to OKC for Lamb/PJIII/Perk

All teams he could go to and not be the 1st or 2nd option which is clearly where his talent lies. Green is a valuable player in that he is a good scorer inside and out and a very good defender on the wing. That has value and if we can't get anything for him I'd just as soon keep him!

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Plus maybe I am in the minority when I say this, but I think Rudy Gay is a better player than Jeff Green.

I'm not sure you're in the minority. Gay might be the better player but their career numbers are so similar it would be hard to make that argument. Gay shoots more but he scores at the same rate. I think the systems each player has been can account for the fluctuation of production. If you compare just last year's numbers Gay is the superior player. If you compare their 2012-13 seasons then Green looks slightly better.

The difference here is that Green has been in Steven's system for a year now, has very similar production to Gay's, is cheaper (and will probably stay cheaper), and we don't have to give up anything for him.

I'm not in to moving Green unless we get a significant upgrade (not exactly growing on trees) or assets to continue the rebuild. Green was our leading scorer so moving him puts us further in the lotto discussion but I'd balk at moving him for the sake of Hinkie-ing. A few ideas I had:

Green to WAS for Porter/Seraphin
Green to CHA for MKG
Green/Bass to OKC for Lamb/PJIII/Perk

All teams he could go to and not be the 1st or 2nd option which is clearly where his talent lies. Green is a valuable player in that he is a good scorer inside and out and a very good defender on the wing. That has value and if we can't get anything for him I'd just as soon keep him!

So you won't trade Jeff Green for a guy who, as a 2nd (or 3rd) option averaged 20 points per game last year, but you'd be willing to move him for bench players or a wing who can defend but cant shoot worth a lick?

I dont see the upgrade in those three proposals. I can see an upgrade from Green to Rudy. For one.

[bucknersrevenge]

Seems what is being ignored here is that we'll have more cap space next year. Wallace's salary will be off the books with the trade, and we don't have Green's player option hanging over our heads either.

Not saying I would do it, but I think the whole "overpriced Gay" angle I've seen in a few post misses the point completely.

The question is, will having Gay now thus making us the favorites to retain him or the alternative if deciding not to keep him and having more cap space next year is more attractive than staying the course with Green and Wallace, one who has a player option and another set to make 10 millions next year as well (and in the meantime look for other opportunities). And of course the retention of the 1st round pick.

It's a good point.

Plus maybe I am in the minority when I say this, but I think Rudy Gay is a better player than Jeff Green.

Minority of who? Celtics fans here?

Sorta yeah. I kinda get the impression not many here are fans of Gay as a player, where I think he'd be an upgrade over JG.

Ugh. I definitely don't. He's a lateral move at best. At worst, he's a unilateral gunner that has the same detrimental effect here that he's had in his last two stops. No thank you sir. Plus, he's going to cost more than Green will for the next 2 years (Green won't be opting out). I get the feeling people wouldn't have even looked at Gay unless the poster from RealGM hadn't said anything.

[crimson_stallion]

Plus maybe I am in the minority when I say this, but I think Rudy Gay is a better player than Jeff Green.

I'm not sure you're in the minority. Gay might be the better player but their career numbers are so similar it would be hard to make that argument. Gay shoots more but he scores at the same rate. I think the systems each player has been can account for the fluctuation of production. If you compare just last year's numbers Gay is the superior player. If you compare their 2012-13 seasons then Green looks slightly better.

The difference here is that Green has been in Steven's system for a year now, has very similar production to Gay's, is cheaper (and will probably stay cheaper), and we don't have to give up anything for him.

I'm not in to moving Green unless we get a significant upgrade (not exactly growing on trees) or assets to continue the rebuild. Green was our leading scorer so moving him puts us further in the lotto discussion but I'd balk at moving him for the sake of Hinkie-ing. A few ideas I had:

Green to WAS for Porter/Seraphin
Green to CHA for MKG
Green/Bass to OKC for Lamb/PJIII/Perk

All teams he could go to and not be the 1st or 2nd option which is clearly where his talent lies. Green is a valuable player in that he is a good scorer inside and out and a very good defender on the wing. That has value and if we can't get anything for him I'd just as soon keep him!

So you won't trade Jeff Green for a guy who, as a 2nd (or 3rd) option averaged 20 points per game last year, but you'd be willing to move him for bench players or a wing who can defend but cant shoot worth a lick?

I dont see the upgrade in those three proposals. I can see an upgrade from Green to Rudy. For one.

Didn't the Raptors go on a nice run last year...after Rudy Gay got traded out?

I've always been intrigued by him as a player, I think he's versatile and skilled.  I'm just not sure that he's really any better than Green overall.

Considering how much Gay's contract is worth (about double that of Green) I just don't think he is THAT much better a player to justify paying that money.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Plus maybe I am in the minority when I say this, but I think Rudy Gay is a better player than Jeff Green.

I'm not sure you're in the minority. Gay might be the better player but their career numbers are so similar it would be hard to make that argument. Gay shoots more but he scores at the same rate. I think the systems each player has been can account for the fluctuation of production. If you compare just last year's numbers Gay is the superior player. If you compare their 2012-13 seasons then Green looks slightly better.

The difference here is that Green has been in Steven's system for a year now, has very similar production to Gay's, is cheaper (and will probably stay cheaper), and we don't have to give up anything for him.

I'm not in to moving Green unless we get a significant upgrade (not exactly growing on trees) or assets to continue the rebuild. Green was our leading scorer so moving him puts us further in the lotto discussion but I'd balk at moving him for the sake of Hinkie-ing. A few ideas I had:

Green to WAS for Porter/Seraphin
Green to CHA for MKG
Green/Bass to OKC for Lamb/PJIII/Perk

All teams he could go to and not be the 1st or 2nd option which is clearly where his talent lies. Green is a valuable player in that he is a good scorer inside and out and a very good defender on the wing. That has value and if we can't get anything for him I'd just as soon keep him!

So you won't trade Jeff Green for a guy who, as a 2nd (or 3rd) option averaged 20 points per game last year, but you'd be willing to move him for bench players or a wing who can defend but cant shoot worth a lick?

I dont see the upgrade in those three proposals. I can see an upgrade from Green to Rudy. For one.

Didn't the Raptors go on a nice run last year...after Rudy Gay got traded out?

I've always been intrigued by him as a player, I think he's versatile and skilled.  I'm just not sure that he's really any better than Green overall.

Considering how much Gay's contract is worth (about double that of Green) I just don't think he is THAT much better a player to justify paying that money.

Paying him that money this year is kinda of irrelevant, considering that the proposal also means moving Wallace's and his contract, so more future flexibility while no real consequences in short term finances.

But in a vacuum, Green > Gay even more so when factoring market value they've had so far.

[Donoghus]

Pass on Gay, hope Green opts out and let him walk, resign Rondo, deal with the Wallace contract for another year with hopes of moving it in '15-'16 when its an expiring. 

Make a splash in summer '16.  I know its not what everyone wants to hear. 

[nostar]

So you won't trade Jeff Green for a guy who, as a 2nd (or 3rd) option averaged 20 points per game last year

He actually averaged 21/6/3 on 48% shooting per-36, which I consider to be really good. I'm just not sure he's a big enough upgrade over Green (or any) to merit a trade. Green averaged 18/5/2 on 47% shooting per-36. Factor in that Gay played with a dominant post player and I'd call it a draw. You can split it toward Gay if you like. It's close enough I'd say it's a matter of opinion.

I dont see the upgrade in those three proposals.

It's like you didn't even read my post.

I'm not in to moving Green unless we get a significant upgrade (not exactly growing on trees) or assets to continue the rebuild.

If you want a list of SFs I think are clear upgrades over Green I'd be happy to provide that.

Kevin Durant
LeBron James
Carmelo Anthony
Paul George

I think Deng/Batum/Iggy are all on the same category as Green and Gay. The "upgrade" argument could be made for those guys too. I didn't include trade proposals for the above list guys because it would be a waste of time.

I can see an upgrade from Green to Rudy. For one.

I showed you the stats and it's not like the Kings went deep in to the playoffs or something. They won 3 more games than we did.

Rudy Gay might be a slight upgrade over Green. I don't really see it. Their career stats bill them as very similar players. Gay shoots more, Green is better from 3, their TS% and eFG% are basically identical. You could make an eye test argument but that is tough to do on a forum.

Considering how much Gay's contract is worth (about double that of Green) I just don't think he is THAT much better a player to justify paying that money.

Exactly my thoughts. Gay is probably going to command about what Deng/Parsons/Hayward got this summer. There are guys in the league that are overpaid. I just don't think Green can be considered one even if some people think he is.

[jonaslopes]

If you want a list of SFs I think are clear upgrades over Green I'd be happy to provide that.

Kevin Durant
LeBron James
Carmelo Anthony
Paul George

And MAYBE Hayward and Parsons. But not Gay. Very good remark.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Pass on Gay, hope Green opts out and let him walk, resign Rondo, deal with the Wallace contract for another year with hopes of moving it in '15-'16 when its an expiring. 

Make a splash in summer '16.  I know its not what everyone wants to hear. 

Hoping Green opts out next year makes no sense when considering your proposal, make a splash in Summer '16.

If your plan is to make a splash in 2016, then it's better to have Green under contract next year. And depending on how much cap space we have, which by my calculations we seem to have plenty even after factoring in Rondo's contract, then it would be good to have Green at 9 million under contract.

So in all, other than we being tight cap wise next year and missing on an opportunity to sign someone because we have Green under contract (in 2015), I can't envision a scenario in which hoping Green opts out next year is of any benefit to us.

[gpap]

Pass on Gay, hope Green opts out and let him walk, resign Rondo, deal with the Wallace contract for another year with hopes of moving it in '15-'16 when its an expiring. 

Make a splash in summer '16.  I know its not what everyone wants to hear.

Disagree. The summer to make the moves is in 2015 because I think the '15 free agents like Jordan, Gasol, Gay and Jefferson are realistic targets and the Celts will have the cap space.

Who's a realistic free agent target for the summer of 2016?  Sure, Durant would be nice, but I also realize the odds of that happening are slim to none.

[Donoghus]

Pass on Gay, hope Green opts out and let him walk, resign Rondo, deal with the Wallace contract for another year with hopes of moving it in '15-'16 when its an expiring. 

Make a splash in summer '16.  I know its not what everyone wants to hear. 

Hoping Green opts out next year makes no sense when considering your proposal, make a splash in Summer '16.

If your plan is to make a splash in 2016, then it's better to have Green under contract next year. And depending on how much cap space we have, which by my calculations we seem to have plenty even after factoring in Rondo's contract, then it would be good to have Green at 9 million under contract.

So in all, other than we being tight cap wise next year and missing on an opportunity to sign someone because we have Green under contract (in 2015), I can't envision a scenario in which hoping Green opts out next year is of any benefit to us.

Honestly, the more I think about it, it doesn't really matter to me if Green opt out or decides to stay one more year.  You can always let him walk after '15-16 too.